See every facility — official ratings, family reviews, no referral fees.
Assisted Living

Lodge at Grand Junction, the

Families consistently rate this highly — reviewers highlight beautiful, modern facility and common areas. Schedule a visit to confirm the fit.

2656 Patterson Rd, Grand Junction, CO 8150650 bedsLicensed & Active
Source: CO CDPHE — view official record
Google rating
4.2/5

based on 21 Google reviews

5
4
3
2
1
Lodge at Grand Junction, the Assisted Living in Grand Junction, CO — Street View
Street View

Watch Lodge at Grand Junction, the

Get an email when new inspections, ratings, or penalties are published for this facility.

We’ll only email you about this — no spam, unsubscribe anytime.

What this means for your family

The Lodge offers a beautiful environment and high-quality dining, which many families appreciate. However, given the serious concerns raised by some families regarding medical responsiveness and staff turnover, we strongly recommend asking specific questions about how the facility manages pain assessments and how they ensure consistent communication with family members.

Google Reviews

Google Reviews

21 reviews on Google
The Lodge at Grand Junction is frequently praised for its beautiful, modern facility and high-quality dining options. While many families report excellent, compassionate care and a welcoming environment, there are serious concerns regarding staff turnover and the handling of medical issues in the memory care unit. Prospective families should weigh the positive physical environment against reports of inconsistent communication and management of resident health needs.

Quality Themes

Tap a score for details
Food9.0Staff7.0Clean9.0Activities4.0Meds3.0Memory5.0Comms4.0ValueN/A

Strengths

  • Beautiful, modern facility and common areas
  • High-quality and delicious meal options
  • Warm, friendly, and engaged staff
  • Professional support during hospice transitions

Concerns

  • High staff and director turnover (mentioned by 2 reviewers)
  • Inadequate communication and responsiveness regarding medical concerns (mentioned by 2 reviewers)

Rating Trends

Tap a year to see what changed

2345.02019(3)3.32021(3)3.42022(5)4.02023(4)5.02024(2)5.02025(2)5.02026(3)

Distribution · 22 analyzed

5
17
4
1
3
0
2
0
1
4

How They Respond to Reviews

24%response rate

This facility rarely responds to reviews.

Questions for Your Tour

  • 1We've heard wonderful things about the quality of the meals here; could you tell us a bit more about the dining menu and how much input residents have in meal choices?
  • 2The common areas look beautiful and modern; how are these spaces used to bring residents together for social interaction?
  • 3Could you walk us through your process for communicating updates regarding a resident's health or changes in their medical needs to the family?
  • 4How does the care team approach medication management to ensure everything is handled accurately and consistently?
  • 5What kind of daily activities or special events do you have planned to keep residents engaged and active in the community?
  • 6In the event of a medical emergency or a change in care needs, such as a transition to hospice, how does the staff coordinate that support?

Personalized based on this facility's data


Key Review Excerpts

My mom lived at The Lodge of Grand Junction for almost 2 years. The things that stood out to her were the food quality - very delicious; and the fact that all staff members knew her name.

Long-term resident's family · 2026★★★★★

I have a hard time getting in contact about my husband- the last few times I went to visit my husband the QMAPS have told me disturbing things about my husband having pain. This pain was brought to the LPN Brittney’s attention and she brushed it off.

Long-term resident's family · 2022☆☆☆☆

From day one, her caregivers have been nothing short of wonderful. The current director, Barb, has surrounded herself with a top-notch team.

Memory care family member · 2023★★★★★
Source: 21 Google reviews

State Inspection History

State Inspections

Source: CO Dept. of Public Health & Environment

8total
2deficiencies
Apr 15, 2026Complaint
CleanReport

No deficiencies found during this inspection.

Jan 6, 2026Complaint
CleanReport

No deficiencies found during this inspection.

Feb 3, 2025Complaint
CleanReport

No deficiencies found during this inspection.

Feb 3, 2025Follow-up
CleanReport

No deficiencies found during this inspection.

Oct 1, 2024Complaint
CleanReport

No deficiencies found during this inspection.

Oct 1, 2024Complaint
N/A0000, 0001, 0910 and 2 more

"12.2.2 Infection Control Officer Each facility shall assign at least one (1) staff member responsible for the site management of the facility' s Infection Prevention and Control Program and training. This individual shall be responsible for the following: (1) (2) Completing an infection prevention and control training from a nationally recognized provider or the Department' s training program within two (2) weeks of appointment/designation that meets the following requirements based on facility type."Based on record review and interview the residence failed to assign at least one staff member responsible for the site management of the residence' s Infection Prevention and Control Program and who had completed an infection prevention and control training two weeks after designation, af.. A relicensure survey with complaint #CO29987 was completed on 10/1/24. Deficiencies were cited. Based on observation, record review and interview, the residence failed to have readily available a roster of current residents which included the residents' emergency contact information and a diagram of the residence that showed room location, affecting 48 current residents. Findings include: On 10/1/24 at 7:30 a.m., the residence' s official resident roster was requested. The roster included the full names of the residents and their room numbers. The resident roster did not include emergency contact information for the residents nor a diagram of the residence. On 10/1/24 at 4:45 p.m., the administrator stated she was unaware of the required components of the resident roster. The administrator added that she had a book of face sheets that could be provided in the event of an emergency tha.. Based on record review and interview, the residence failed to ensure its emergency policies addressed written agreements with other facilities or community agencies in the event of the relocation of residents, affecting 48 current residents. Findings include: Review of the residences' undated temporary relocation procedure policy read "The (residence) has agreements with the relocation sites indicated on the following pages." The following pages had blank spaces to insert the required information. The policy further read "The residence will establish a relationship with appropriate transportation companies," and "The residence has agreements with the following suitable transportation companies." There were no documented agreements with transportation companies. On 10/1/24 at 10.. Based upon record review and interview, the residence failed to ensure medication cart audits were completed by the administrator and qualified medication administration person (QMAP) supervisor on a quarterly basis, affecting 48 current residents.Findings include1. ReferencesThe residence' s 12/1/23 medication records policy read in part that medication records would be audited on a quarterly basis. On 10/1/24 at approximately 9:30 a.m., the controlled substance list was requested and not received during the onsite visit. On 10/1/24 at approximately 1:40 p.m., documentation of quarterly medication audits were reviewed, and there was no evidence that the administrator participated in the audit. 2. Interviews On 10/1/24 at approximately 1:40 p.m., the resident care coordinator stated ..

Oct 1, 2024Complaint
CleanReport

No deficiencies found during this inspection.

Oct 1, 2024Follow-up
N/A0000, 0910, 1604

A licensure revisit was completed on 10/1/24 for the previous deficiency cited on 4/26/22. Deficiencies were cited. The regulations governing Assisted Living Residences were revised. The new Chapter VII regulations were implemented on 7/1/24. Tag 10.1 was not cited in the previous event; however, the deficiency was included in the previous event' s informational 999 tag. Based on observation, record review and interview, the residence failed to have readily available a roster of current residents which included the residents' emergency contact information and a diagram of the residence that showed room location, affecting 48 current residents. Findings include: On 10/1/24 at 7:30 a.m., the residence' s official resident roster was requested. The roster included the full names of the residents and their room numbers. The resident roster did not include emergency contact information for the residents nor a diagram of the residence. On 10/1/24 at 4:45 p.m., the administrator stated she was unaware of the required components of the resident roster. The administrator added that she had a book of face sheets that could be provided in the event of an emergency that had the required emergency contact information. She acknowledged the resident roster was missing the residents' emergency contact information and a diagram of the residence. The administrator stated this deficiency that was previously an informational tag was not corrected due to lack of oversight and knowledge of the required components of a resident roster. Based upon record review and interview, the residence failed to ensure medication cart audits were completed by the administrator and qualified medication administration person (QMAP) supervisor on a quarterly basis, affecting 48 current residents.This deficiency was cited previously during a state licensure survey 8/18/22. Although the residence corrected the deficiency, based on the findings below, the residence has not maintained compliance with this regulatory requirement.Findings include1. ReferencesThe residence' s 12/1/23 medication records policy read in part that medication records would be audited on a quarterly basis. On 10/1/24 at approximately 9:30 a.m., the controlled substance list was requested and not received during the onsite visit. On 10/1/24 at approximately 1:40 p.m., documentation of quarterly medication audits were reviewed, and there was no evidence that the administrator participated in the audit. 2. Interviews On 10/1/24 at approximately 1:40 p.m., the resident care coordinator stated she often completed medication cart audits; however, the administrator did not participate on a quarterly basis. On 10/1/24 at 4:45 p.m., the administrator stated she oversaw all aspects of the residence but felt quarterly medication audits did not need to be completed by the administrator in case of probable liability issues with medications. The a..

Contact

Get in Touch

Contact this facility directly and verify the details that matter most to your family.

References & Resources

EveryPlace is a research directory. Facility information is compiled from public sources — Medicare.gov, state licensing portals, Google Places, and publicly available street-level imagery. Listings do not constitute endorsement, recommendation, or advertisement, and we do not accept payment for placement. Families should verify all details directly with the facility and the original sources linked above before making any care decisions. See our Research Policy for our editorial standards, correction process, and image-removal policy.

Nearby Alternatives

Call